<quoted text>If God had a name, what would it beAnd would you call it to his faceIf you were faced with him in all his gloryWhat would you ask if you had just one questionAnd yeah yeah God is great yeah yeah God is goodyeah yeah yeah yeah yeahWhat if God was one of usJust a slob like one of usJust a stranger on the busTrying to make his way homeIf God had a face what would it look likeAnd would you want to seeIf seeing meant that you would have to believeIn things like heaven and in jesus and the saints and all the prophetsAnd yeah yeah god is great yeah yeah god is goodyeah yeah yeah yeah yeahWhat if God was one of usJust a slob like one of usJust a stranger on the busTrying to make his way homeHe's trying to make his way homeBack up to heaven all aloneNobody calling on the phoneExcept for the pope maybe in romeAnd yeah yeah God is great yeah yeah God is goodyeah yeah yeah yeah yeahWhat if god was one of usJust a slob like one of usJust a stranger on the busTrying to make his way homeJust trying to make his way homeLike a holy rolling stoneBack up to heaven all aloneJust trying to make his way homeNobody calling on the phoneExcept for the pope maybe in romesource: http://www.lyricsondemand.com/onehitwonders/i...

<quoted text>.. neat post, Timn! Can still remember where I was, what I was doing when 9-11 happened. Although I'm not a great believer in the power of prayer, my head bowed, my heart skipped a beat and I silently thought, "Oh, my God." Yes, there was fear .... was my 'moment' a silent prayer begging for grace, or was it empathy for those murdered, the idea of such a heinous act being beyond my comprehension? Yes, for a few weeks America was united, then, as usual, we became fractured over solutions .... why ??..

<quoted text>Only some of the pay gap is the result of discrimination by employers. Men crowd into high-paying fields like engineering, while women dominate lower-paying fields like education and social service. And women are more likely than men to fall off the career track when they have children. They take time off and lose skills, or they opt for less-demanding jobs so they can spend more time at home. Most fathers, in contrast, manage to skate through parenthood without the slightest harm to their careers. Employers could offer family-friendlier policies on leave and flextime, but they cant be blamed for dads who dont do enough around the house.www.businessweek.com/.../equal-payIt's Time That We End the Equal Pay Myth:There are numerous other factors that affect pay. Most fundamentally, men and women tend to gravitate toward different industries. Feminists may charge that women are socialized into lower-paying sectors of the economy. But women considering the decisions theyve made likely have a different view. Women tend to seek jobs with regular hours, more comfortable conditions, little travel, and greater personal fulfillment. Often times, women are willing to trade higher pay for jobs with other characteristics that they find attractive.Men, in contrast, often take jobs with less desirable characteristics in pursuit of higher pay. They work long hours and overnight shifts. They tar roofs in the sun, drive trucks across the country, toil in sewer systems, stand watch as prison guards, and risk injury on fishing boats, in coal mines, and in production plants. Such jobs pay more than others because otherwise no one would want to do them.en.wikipedia.org/.../Equal_pay_for_ ...You have your "stats", I have mine :)

EEOC Sues Amtrak For Sex-Based Wage Discrimination And Retaliation

PHILADELPHIA  The nations largest rail carrier paid a human resources regional director less money because of her sex and then unlawfully retaliated against her when she complained about the wage discrimination, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it announced today.

The EEOC charged that beginning in 2001, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, also known as Amtrak, discriminated against Sheila Davidson in her compensation and work assignments because of her sex. The EEOC said that Amtrak paid Davidson, a human resources manager assigned to the rail carriers 30th Street Station in Philadelphia, the same salary as it paid two male human resources regional directors, even though ******Davidson had more relevant experience and was assigned a far greater workload than her male counterparts.******

HOME DEPOT TO PAY $5.5 MILLION TO RESOLVE CLASS DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT IN COLORADO

EEOC Suit Alleged Retaliation and Harassment Based on Race, Sex, and National Origin

DENVER - The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today announced the simultaneous filing and resolution of a class-wide discrimination and retaliation lawsuit against Atlanta-based Home Depot, U.S.A., Inc., on behalf of employees in the company's Colorado stores (Civil Action No. 04 D 1776; U.S. District of Colorado).

If the settlement is approved by a U.S. District Judge in Colorado, Home Depot will pay $5.5 million to current and former employees, as well as significant injunctive relief. The EEOC lawsuit alleges that in Home Depot's Colorado stores, there was a hostile work environment based on gender, race, and national origin, and that the company retaliated against employees who complained about discrimination.

<quoted text>come on i thought you were a bit smarter than most of these yahoos on here, where did my post say i 'hated' single parents? it did not.i said the womens lib movement brought women to this point in history where they prefer to work rather than raise their children as a stay home mom or dad.and when women develope the ATTITUDE they don't 'need' a structured family unit, they often find themselves with no financial support by a husband. Its sad, my heart goes out to them.it would be a very hard way to survive.If a child could pick and choose they would opt for a mom and dad over anything else, if they had the choice that is.I don't hate anyone.

.. Patricia, do you ever think before you write ??..

.. some women prefer being a 'stay-at-home' mom, some women opt for a career. Because of the liberation movement of the 70s, women now have choices ..

.. you've never been a mom, yet, once again, you consider yourself an authority on any subject. Would a child prefer a mom and dad that are abusive or one loving parent ??..

<quoted text>no one is talking about equal rights to work, pay, oppertunity.you miss the point.children need structure.and if you ask ANY child out there if they could choose would they want a mom and a dad or just one parent, they will always say they want both a mom and a dad.

<quoted text>no one is talking about equal rights to work, pay, oppertunity.you miss the point.children need structure.and if you ask ANY child out there if they could choose would they want a mom and a dad or just one parent, they will always say they want both a mom and a dad.of course people die, thats unavoidable.but who suffers in single parent familys? the children do.you can't sit there and say it is the prefered option or that it is easy.and yes i think men should be the ones who go off to war if war is happening.not women.men are the protectors.

Uh....I was talking about equal rights under the law- just because YOU are not doesn't mean NO ONE is.

In a perfect world, all children have structure in their lives, but where you get there is necessarily or automatically an absence of structure if a child is raised by a single parent is truly moronic.

True that most children would prefer two parents, but not if one of those parents is an abuser or neglects them.

In such situations, children are better off with one parent who is stable, loving and nurturing and that could be fathers as well as mothers.

LOL!! And women aren't or can't be "protectors"?? You are the one who thinks child-rearing is much more a woman's domain than a man's- don't you think women protect their children?

So who are you to say women shouldn't go off to war to protect our country?

<quoted text>earthquakes have always happened every day you mad old crumpnugget and volcanoeseverything thats always happened is still happeneing and nobody is surprised except the losers searching for a prophecy to wave around

.. Patricia wants the world to end so Christ will return. She'll then trade in her "Jesus Loves Me" vibrator for the real deal ..

<quoted text>no one is talking about equal rights to work, pay, oppertunity.you miss the point.children need structure.and if you ask ANY child out there if they could choose would they want a mom and a dad or just one parent, they will always say they want both a mom and a dad.of course people die, thats unavoidable.but who suffers in single parent familys? the children do.you can't sit there and say it is the prefered option or that it is easy.and yes i think men should be the ones who go off to war if war is happening.not women.men are the protectors.

Hmmmm. I wonder what the children of abusive fathers, alcoholic fathers have to say?????

<quoted text>I said that the mecca thing was an extreme example - you wouldn't have a snowball's chance to stop the pilgrimage. I was just illustrating a point - some people feel as though they are being surrounded by a tradition they don't follow, and they either have to go along with it or risk being ostracized. Again, I don't really care and actually enjoy Christmas, but I sympathize with the people who would like the holiday season to be more inclusive.Also, the US was not founded on christian principles. The founders made several very clear statements to this effect - and they codified their belief in the separation of church and state in the constitution.I very seriously doubt that the "banning" of using the name of god has anything to do with the condition of the country. The 9/11 thing is an interesting example of how people respond to disasters - patriotism, jingoism, and very direct displays of religious sentiment were very common. It was an attempt to affirm our "national identity" in the face of a threat. That's why it became "ok" to "talk about god" so openly.

Just stating how I feel about the situation. Separation of church and state came after the U.S. was founded. It clearly states in the Declaration of Independence "The laws of nature and the laws of natures God". As far as codifying goes in the Constitution, I believe you are referring to the First Amendment, which, in it, says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...". The point of such an amendment is twofold. First, it ensures that religious beliefs - private or organized - are removed from attempted government control. This is the reason why the government cannot tell either you or your church what to believe or to teach. Second, it ensures that the government does not get involved with enforcing, mandating, or promoting particular religious doctrines. This is what happens when the government "establishes" a church - and because doing so created so many problems in Europe, the authors of the Constitution wanted to try and prevent the same from happening here. So this country was founded UNDER God yet our forefathers needed to clarify a few things first before leaving such a statement open for scrutiny and attack. The founding fathers wanted this nation to be under God but have no particular denomination be the ruling or the only excepted religion, that all religions were acceptable. As far as Christmas goes, I just feel that the U.S. should stop worrying about offending people. The only thing Christmas has to do with Christianity is that it "represents"/symboli zes the birth of Jesus. Christmas was derived from Paganism in actuality. There was also some speculation that Jesus was born in the summer time (I think I read June/July) and not actually December. There is a book out there called "The Jesus Papers" which states that Jesus wasn't even crucified, that he actually died of old age (not saying I believe this - never finished reading the book). People have been surrounded with Christmas for many years. Why now make a stink? I think it's because people need something to bitch about and they'll go to any length to complain. People LOVE to whine and moan. Yes, 9/11 did bring people together that particular day and days to follow, however, when hurricane Sandy hit, there was a ton of looting, shootings and stabbings over the gas shortage. I know someone's nephew who was stabbed over gas. I say, "Way to come together people". Where was the patronage there? What that tells me is that when a "supposed other country attacks" (larger scale - I still believe the U.S. government was behind it), we come together but when mother nature attacks (smaller scale), we stand alone. The double standard is sickening. ANYWAY, not looking to go tit for tat. We can just agree to disagree.

<quoted text>.. as I see the God within Al, I also see the God within you .... can you see the God within me, Catcher or Scar ??..

When you say you see the God within Al and me...how would you describe the God you see?

I see goodness and many characteristics that could be viewed as Godly in both you and Catcher...not sure who Scar is. In you, I see a great deal of things though. You're complex. I'd send you roses, that's for sure!

<quoted text>you got that right!look whats happened in just the past few days.big companies are going belly up, walk outs are planned in walmarts on black friday, no christmas lights in Europe, Polygamy is now the new frontier to be legalized, stock market down,just to name a few.....and earthquakes happen now EVERY day on this planet.COME QUICKLY LORD!

<quoted text>.. neat post, Timn! Can still remember where I was, what I was doing when 9-11 happened. Although I'm not a great believer in the power of prayer, my head bowed, my heart skipped a beat and I silently thought, "Oh, my God." Yes, there was fear .... was my 'moment' a silent prayer begging for grace, or was it empathy for those murdered, the idea of such a heinous act being beyond my comprehension? Yes, for a few weeks America was united, then, as usual, we became fractured over solutions .... why ??..

Me too. Interesting tidbit though - I believe they did a study that showed that most people do not have a very accurate memory of 9/11, despite the fact that most people have a very "vivid" recollection.

<quoted text>Just stating how I feel about the situation. Separation of church and state came after the U.S. was founded. It clearly states in the Declaration of Independence "The laws of nature and the laws of natures God". As far as codifying goes in the Constitution, I believe you are referring to the First Amendment, which, in it, says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...". The point of such an amendment is twofold. First, it ensures that religious beliefs - private or organized - are removed from attempted government control. This is the reason why the government cannot tell either you or your church what to believe or to teach. Second, it ensures that the government does not get involved with enforcing, mandating, or promoting particular religious doctrines. This is what happens when the government "establishes" a church - and because doing so created so many problems in Europe, the authors of the Constitution wanted to try and prevent the same from happening here. So this country was founded UNDER God yet our forefathers needed to clarify a few things first before leaving such a statement open for scrutiny and attack. The founding fathers wanted this nation to be under God but have no particular denomination be the ruling or the only excepted religion, that all religions were acceptable. As far as Christmas goes, I just feel that the U.S. should stop worrying about offending people. The only thing Christmas has to do with Christianity is that it "represents"/symboli zes the birth of Jesus. Christmas was derived from Paganism in actuality. There was also some speculation that Jesus was born in the summer time (I think I read June/July) and not actually December. There is a book out there called "The Jesus Papers" which states that Jesus wasn't even crucified, that he actually died of old age (not saying I believe this - never finished reading the book). People have been surrounded with Christmas for many years. Why now make a stink? I think it's because people need something to bitch about and they'll go to any length to complain. People LOVE to whine and moan. Yes, 9/11 did bring people together that particular day and days to follow, however, when hurricane Sandy hit, there was a ton of looting, shootings and stabbings over the gas shortage. I know someone's nephew who was stabbed over gas. I say, "Way to come together people". Where was the patronage there? What that tells me is that when a "supposed other country attacks" (larger scale - I still believe the U.S. government was behind it), we come together but when mother nature attacks (smaller scale), we stand alone. The double standard is sickening. ANYWAY, not looking to go tit for tat. We can just agree to disagree.

Sure, we can agree to disagree, but this is a matter of fact, not a matter of opinion.

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Muslim] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Yes, some of the founders were christians, but many were not, but either way all of them had the good sense to know that government and religion don't mix. Interpret the establishment clause any way you like - but it clearly states that the government shouldn't meddle with, promote, or otherwise associate itself with religion.

Forgot to mention - middle paragraph in my post is a quote, obviously.

You'd have a better case for a religious beginning to our nation if there was some aspect of our laws/declarations/etc that was decidedly "religious," for which you couldn't find an equally plausible secular precedent. If there existed in the US some law that could have *only* came from religion, and not from any secular source, you might have a case.

And I'm not saying that the founders weren't influenced by their respective religious beliefs at all, obviously some were, but the point is they made an active attempt to separate their personal beliefs from their leadership -and they thought this was an important enough ideal to codify it into law for future generations to follow.

I am sooo jealous! What I wouldn't give to be 19 again and know what I know now!

I remember that day vividly...and the sick feeling I had in my stomach as I stood glued to the television watching as the 2nd plane hit the second tower. It would have been nice to have been 8 and not understood what was occurring. The misfortune, today, is that a lot of people, who now vote, didn't understand what happened that day either.

<quoted text>So you're what?? 19I am sooo jealous! What I wouldn't give to be 19 again and know what I know now!I remember that day vividly...and the sick feeling I had in my stomach as I stood glued to the television watching as the 2nd plane hit the second tower. It would have been nice to have been 8 and not understood what was occurring. The misfortune, today, is that a lot of people, who now vote, didn't understand what happened that day either.

I'm sure most of us would love to be younger than we are if we could be younger and have the knowledge we now have, but that's the catch and one of the good things about growing older- gaining knowledge....but would I want to be 19 again knowing only what I knew at 19?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.